Jump to content

Talk:No-carbohydrate diet: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 43: Line 43:


:Nor is it alone in the no-carbohydrate category; certainly, reagent-quality pure protein derived from plant sources, bacteria, or synthesized protein would contain zero carbohydrates. Other forgotten foods include vegetable oil, which also contains no carbohydrate. [[User Talk:David spector|David Spector (talk)]] 20:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
:Nor is it alone in the no-carbohydrate category; certainly, reagent-quality pure protein derived from plant sources, bacteria, or synthesized protein would contain zero carbohydrates. Other forgotten foods include vegetable oil, which also contains no carbohydrate. [[User Talk:David spector|David Spector (talk)]] 20:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


The name is wrong. This article is not about No-Carb diets which does not appear to exist in modern humans. The examples given of what can be eaten are of foods that contain carbs - they may be quite low but they are carbs nonetheless. (Eggs and dairy have carbs.) It would make more sense to remove the article and redirect all searches for No-Carb Diet to the Low-Carb Diet page. And include a note there about the non-existence of this diet.


== Organization ==
== Organization ==

Revision as of 05:20, 10 May 2012


WPFood assessment

Low importance C-class article on controversial diet.

The article needs attention to:

  • Apparent NPOV
  • Possible OR
  • Uncited or improperly cited sources

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point of view

This article is clearly written in support of this diet. Go ask any 5 medical dieticians whether it is a good idea to remove vegatables, complex carbohydrates, and fiber from one's diet - odds are, they'll all say no. This article fails to address any of the opposing views, and appears to be sourced exclusively from supporting sources instead of independent ones. It would seem that this article was created in order to avoid being associated with the negatives presented in the Low-carbohydrate diet article. DrAvery 20:00, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contribution DrAvery, surely you could provide this article with these much-needed opposing views/facts; as a physician it can only be presumed that you have extensive access to informational resources beyond what the common wiki user has. Would you mind providing whatever number of hyperlinks which both substantiate these "opposing views" and represent the actual balance of support in the medical community. Thank you!

Negatives

This was the first Wiki page I ever made, and I admit its biased simply because of my experience with it (over 6 months as of today), and the fact that i dont know of any negative factors associated with this diet (aside from the fact that you cant eat 90% of the foods you normally ate). This page is also grossly incomplete, and doesnt properly explain the diet and the biological reasons behind it, all of which information is found in the links I provided. I made the page so that there is awareness that this diet even exists, and to provide a central database for all of the zero-carb info thats scattered on the web. The page itself needs to be significantly augmented without a doubt. I seriously disagree with your assessment that this is basically the low-carb diet. This diet is a 100% carnivore diet allowing no vegetable, fruit, nut or any other plant matter whatsoever, that fact alone making it radically different from any version of the Low-Carb program currently used. I would also certainly welcome any cited negative factors of it, but more along the lines of population studies, not opinions from dietitians. Most dietiticans dont even support low-carb diets, I would not expect any support from them on something like this. Not to mention that doctors have their own biases. In sum, this is a very very rough draft and I look forward to someone putting in the time to expand it and present a more complete picture of this approach to diet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Classic69 (talkcontribs) 08:47, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Carnivorism = Zero-Carb Diet

When the article on Carnivorism was proposed for deletion, I suggested a redirect to Zero-Carb Diet; but the eventual decision was a redirect to Carnivore. The good news is that previous versions of Carnivorism are still available, in case anyone wishes to salvage anything from any of those versions. — Haim Berman 13:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reject: Technically, meat contains some carbohydrate (manufactured in the source animals' bodies from protein so they can have energy), so carnivorism would properly be called a very low carbohydrate diet.
Nor is it alone in the no-carbohydrate category; certainly, reagent-quality pure protein derived from plant sources, bacteria, or synthesized protein would contain zero carbohydrates. Other forgotten foods include vegetable oil, which also contains no carbohydrate. David Spector (talk) 20:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The name is wrong. This article is not about No-Carb diets which does not appear to exist in modern humans. The examples given of what can be eaten are of foods that contain carbs - they may be quite low but they are carbs nonetheless. (Eggs and dairy have carbs.) It would make more sense to remove the article and redirect all searches for No-Carb Diet to the Low-Carb Diet page. And include a note there about the non-existence of this diet.

Organization

Yea I looked at the old carnivorism page (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carnivorism&oldid=146752687). The problem both with that page and mine is that the entire concept is summarized but not explained in detail, im just too lazy to meticulously detail and site everything, the people i created this page for were already looking for it in the first place, its here because theres almost no easily found information on this on the internet, even though its in my opinion one of the most important subjects to begin with. Basically what I did was give a summary so I could link all the other documents about it on one page, I personally cannot make unbiased revisions to this page considering im a zealot to this diet and it changed my life, soo if someone less passionate or less biased could take up the burden of organizing this that'd be great, although to completely explain all the biological background behind this reasoning would take quite a bit of space. I'm pleasantly surprised though that someone already attempted to put this on here before, although i disagree about dairy being an acceptable part of zero carb, except for butter, mostly due to the extremely unbalanced calcium-magnesium ratio which in the long run compromises your bone density and tooth health among many other things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.81.102 (talk) 06:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inuit Health

Whoever put the section about the Inuit having high cardiovascular disease in, im deleting it because the tests were performed on Inuit after they were introduced to modern carbohydrate diet, aka these were modern inuit not traditional carb-free population, thus the result is nullified, the inuit are apparently even more sensitive to a high-carb diet than for example a middle-eastern man would be since they have had no exposure to agricultural foods, thus they suffer even higher rates of disease when introduced to such foods, and NO INCIDENCE OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE when staying on a zero carb, salt free diet which is their traditional way

Instead of deleting sourced information, please expand the explanation, making sure it is properly sourced. Please also remember to sign your comments. OccamzRazor (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 1972 article referenced showing high Eskimo mortality shows just the opposite. It shows 5/1000 with heart disease in the Eskimo population, and 50/1000 in the caucasion population. -C.M.Kaiser —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.134.136.2 (talk) 20:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The statement about Inuit mortality from coronary disease is also inconsistent with comments from the Vilhjalmur Stefansson article, in which mortality is mainly attributed to stroke. Isn't there some process for ensuring internal consistency between separate articles that refer to the same material? My guess is that someone confused cerebrovascular disease with cardiovascular disease. Therefore the article will need to reference these two medical articles and may need to specify explicitly that Inuit have a high risk of haemorrhagic stroke and a low risk of atherosclerotic disease like ischaemic stroke and coronary disease.Beoplayer (talk) 10:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the Drew Carey example

I read the article (the link might be broken, i had to use a search engine but it might have been my browser) and I can't understand exactly how it is an example of a "No-Carbohydrate Diet" or a "100% meat" or a "carnivorous" diet to serve as an example of said diets reversing diabetes. It belongs in a diabetes article, not here in my opinion, as Carey doesn't seem to follow any of these specific diets and the article doesn't expicitly mention any medical explanation for the reversal of his diabetes (which if it did and there was a relation, i'd be ok with).

Furthermore, the link mentions "diabetes" and AFAIK acquired diabetes such as Carey's is not the only form of diabetes, hence it doesn't present an generic example of diabetes reversal, rather an example of acquired health problems reversed by a change of diet.

2.85.18.175 (talk) 19:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]